Save thousands and thousands of lives (children's lives included) by getting your hands very, very dirty.
Add Comment
20 comments
Tip: Use the arrow keys to navigate between questions.
Recently Answered
- You haven't answered any questions yet.
dsshorty89
It'd be hard, but it'd be for the greater good.
Azer Faraclas
According to John Rawls it's what I you ought to do.
b1tchf4ce
Perhaps once I killed the kids, they would get their act together and start a civilization which excludes bloodshed in the future
GreenLemon
No
warface363
when it says debate, it doesnt mean just saying no. it means back up your decision with reasoning. i vote yes because if i weren't to kill those children, i would thereby still be responsible for the deaths of the thousands in the middle east. even if you dont do it yourself. you may not like it, and you say "theres a better way!", it doesnt give you that option. its either 5 kids, or ONGOING wars and terrorism, not something you can stop. so you would be dooming the region to endless death and hardship. way to go you selfish jerks.
Evan Glick
By that logic you are therefore responsible for 1 instance of every bad thing every charity you've never donated to is trying to prevent.
brokor
like i care what those brown people do between themselves. 5 or 25k it doesnt matter. i wouldnt kill anyone myself, but i would need confirmation that no nuclear war would take place. otherwise shotguns and napalm cant rly hurt me all ti does is rid the earth of overpopulation, which is a good thing.
Evan Glick
[Insert racist comment here] [insert comment no one reads after that first part here]
Evan Glick
[Insert racist comment here] [Insert part no one is reading because of the first part here]
Evan Glick
[Insert racist comment here] [Insert part no one is reading because of the first part here]
ruth2012
sacrifice one thing, receive a lot of blessings.
cheylabob
Well they could be innocent terminally ill comatose orphan kids for all we know... Seems legit. Plus, for those religious people, then they get to go to heaven. Amidoinitrite?
Sean MacLean
Either way innocent children are going to be killed. It's really a way up between losing five or losing a lot more than five.
p01arb33r
by letting the wars continue, you slaughter more than 5 children and tons of other good people. red fails.
SwaggerCoach
8300 dont know innocent children get killed in the middle east also so 5 of them doesnt sound so bad.idiots.
Julia
I'd kill some kids. >.>
Meadsey
Same shit is going to continue in 25 years.
MarkTheGr8
First I was gonna go with killing the 5 children. But I remembered... OVERPOPULATION.. We're already growing too quickly. Someone mentioned something about dooming the middle east to hardships... Well, there's not enough resources in the world for everyone to have perfect lives. Some things are just not meant to be. It may sound cold, but in my experience I'd rather have more white and asian people than those of muslim nations. Racism? Probably. Now get over it. Furthermore, there is the chance wars would move from the middle east to somewhere else. History shows that if there is not war in one place, there is another. Lastly, another person said not killing the 5 children, would mean you're responsible for the wars, terrorism in the middle east. That is incorrect, as you cannot be held responsible for other's actions (in this case). Killing 5 children will get you behind bars, but to imprison someone for not killing 5 children? Good luck convincing the judge!
Steve Norton
most of the bad shit that happens starts with the greater good in mind.
Morgan
let's say that abortion counts. Become a doctor. Abort 5 pregnancies. Save the world. Become successful. Profit.
Kyle
Far more than 5 innocent kids will die in the course of the Middel Eastern conflicts.